Lethal or non lethal? Why would KITT ask this?

[Sky_Blue_Civic]

Except no... As Charles said in Knight Fever and I quote, "KITT's primary guiding principal is that he do no harm to people. It's built in, literally hardwired into his core memory." So no, when it comes to that kind of thing it's something that's there and not meant to be overridden or changed as the new KITT's personality progresses. It makes the "lethal" comment out of place, even as a poor attempt at humor.


EDIT: GAH! Beat me to it!

Maybe KI3T doesn't have the choice to use a lethal method,but he can if he is given permission by someone.

[PunkMaister]

Are you guys seriously arguing over this? good lord. Honestly like some people have said in some situations it might have been acceptable to use lethal force. But in this case KITT did not know what to respond to so he asked Michael and Micheal said non lethal! That than goes into KITT's programming end of story!

Not according to a lot of people here, according to them KITT could not use lethal force no matter how dire the situation.

[t.b.77b]

Yes but Micheal was not being immediately attacked or put in a life threatening situation which would require a lethal solution, and so the question really didn't need to be, nor should have been, asked.

And even if they where about to open fire on him, The solution was the same one as Kitt used anyway.. Dart them.

In TOS Kitt would have distracted them with police sirens or something and Micheal would have jumped them. There was nothing in that scene that even really required that question to be asked.

edit:
OMG! They could have used that scene for a classic KR flash back Kitt distracting and Micheal attacking.

Jump 3 chicks armed with machine guns from over 6 feet away? Yeah right!

And as I said before KITT is still learning.

I agree with Punk on this one it would be stupid to have jump those three and even though most of Knight Rider is far from the truth that in my opinion would have made it way to unrealistic.

[KnightCrusader99]

You know, I didn't catch this but my 14 year-old brother did. Shows you how much I pay attention....

Here is what I told him:

I think it is safe to assume that the new KITT's core programming is based off the original's, both of which Graiman designed. What was it that Devon told Michael in the pilot? KITT was programmed with the preservation of human life, specifically his: Michael Arthur Long's? We never saw it in TOS but I am sure if it came down to it, Michael's life vs. the bad guy's, KITT's programming would direct him to save Michael's over the other's...

I am sure it was the same way with the 3000's programming and Mike. Russian chicks with machine guns vs. Mike. KITT wasn't sure if he should elevate to lethal force, so he asked. Mike was obviously annoyed that he would think he would need heavy force like that.

Mike said the right thing. Now could you imagine if KITT just assumed it was a dire situation and pulled out the big guns instead? Then we'd have a problem...

But I do agree with some people.... there are too many offensive weapons on the new KITT. However, I realize it is 22 years later and things have changed. And we've seen the previews of KARR... we know KITT is going to need them now...

[Lost Knight]

Guys,

Let's not forget that KITT took the life of Ryan Arrow last week. Whilst he felt remorse over the accident, KITT’s programming will have been irreversibly changed thanks to his capacity to learn from the people and events that surround him.

Thus, whilst we may not agree with it, the option to use lethal methods is now ingrained into KITT’s programming.

Matt

However, Matthew, if we refer to "Killer K.I.T.T." in the original series, Marco Berio programmed K.I.T.T. to attack and kill Michael as well as use the word "ain't," etc. Whilst K.I.T.T. was in captivity at the time, he recalled all the things he'd done, but yet it never stopped him from obeying his preservation of human life programming thereafter. Shouldn't the same logic apply here? Or do you think the circumstances are different?

[Rockatteer]

"KITT's primary guiding principal is that he do no harm to people. It's built in, literally hardwired into his core memory."

That means that Kitt would never purposely kill someone.It also means that the programming can't be changed by what he learns. And in this particular scene he had a non-lethal solution which worked perfectly. Even if they where about to shoot at Mike, the darts would still have worked, so there was actually no need for a lethal solution at all.

In fact I'm trying to think of a situation which would come up in an episode where a lethal solution was required.

I think we need to make a distinction of what we are talking about by lethal action too. Kitt allowing some idiot bomber to blow himself up while Kitt saves the innocent lives isn't a lethal solution on Kitts part, because Kitt isn't actually triggering the solution himself.. i.e not firing a gun at the guy.

[WIBoomer1]

In that case, I shall quote from the book of Spock:

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few....or the one."

KITT would take all things into consideration, and offer/execute the plan that would save as many people as possible.

BUT he wouldn't knowingly try to KILL someone, for killing's sake. If someone died because of the direct result of KITT's actions, then KITT's programming would be at fault.

[Matthew]

However, Matthew, if we refer to "Killer K.I.T.T." in the original series, Marco Berio programmed K.I.T.T. to attack and kill Michael as well as use the word "ain't," etc. Whilst K.I.T.T. was in captivity at the time, he recalled all the things he'd done, but yet it never stopped him from obeying his preservation of human life programming thereafter. Shouldn't the same logic apply here? Or do you think the circumstances are different?

I honestly believe that the difference between Marco Bario and the nanovirus, is that in spite of it all, the original KITT never managed to successfully execute his orders, whereas the new KITT executed his, and ultimately took a man’s life.

This is what makes me think that the Knight 3000 has learnt from his experience at the hands of the nanovirus, as he’s obviously realised that he may be forced to kill again if the situation calls for it, which is an extremely interesting, and ultimately dangerous twist.

Matt

[PunkMaister]

In that case, I shall quote from the book of Spock:

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few....or the one."

KITT would take all things into consideration, and offer/execute the plan that would save as many people as possible.

BUT he wouldn't knowingly try to KILL someone, for killing's sake. If someone died because of the direct result of KITT's actions, then KITT's programming would be at fault.

Precisely Eureka you got it and thank you for quoting the great Spock!

[lunchmeat]

This is an interesting thread and I feel it's appropriate to reference Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics:

1.) A robot cannot directly harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to be harmed.
2.) A robot cannot disobey a direct order from a human, unless it violates the first law.
3.) A robot cannot harm itself, or through inaction, allow itself to come to harm, unless violating the first or second law.

Asimov's stuff is pretty interesting - all of his stories revolve around these three laws, and how the robots ultimately interpret these laws. They're intriguing, offering up scenarios we might not have thought of.

In this case....it is an interesting dilemma. It is admittedly difficult to argue for KI3T's reasoning behind his question, when he had a non-lethal solution prepared for the problem at hand. While it does stand to reason that KI3T would defer to Michael in these situation, his question was unwarranted and does not fit with his core programming, as others have mentioned.

It is arguable that KI3T's lethal solution might have been faster than his darts - KI3T could have fired his laser at the three enemies, presumably requiring less targeting time and less startup time (KI3T had to extend the dart launcher physically aim at the antagonists, whereas a laser shot would have been instantaneous). We can argue that KI3T's programming places priority on Mike's life, and since Mike was in immediate danger, KI3T had to act quickly. We know that this is a TV show, but the characters had no way of knowing that the three ladies would stall - in the time that KI3T took to extend the dart launcher, the ladies could have shot Mike. I believe this is one reason why KI3T took the time to ask Michael his question.

Another reason deals with KI3T's preservation of life and conflicting values (which is why I mentioned Asimov earlier). This is a less plausible idea, but KI3T would logically have to place priority on all human lives he affects. In this case, these lives would include Mike's life, the life of the Ambassador hostage, the lives of the three female antagonists, and the life of the prison hostage. If one or more had to die, who would KI3T choose and why? Additionally, we'd have to factor in the situation as a whole, with the threat of a manufactured bomb on the horizon and Mike's exposure to radiation. That's a lot of processing, but KI3T probably came to a final conclusion for a course of action designed to save the most lives, as per Spock's directive. Knowing that a decision like this should be made by a higher authority, however, he deferred to Mike in this position.

Quite honestly? We'll never really know. It may have been an oversight on the writer's part, or it may actually get worked into something else. I don't think we'll ever know. However, as I stated before, there are a lot of good Asimov stories out there that deal with the First Law in particular, and they are interesting reads. Reading them might provide a greater understanding about how KI3T might think in a situation like this.

[taoworm2323]

Just my very short 2 cents...

1.) It was the writers dropping the ball for a second. (Like it was a viper episode or something )
2.) KITT would never attack a human. (hard wired in)
3.) The virus caused last weeks "death by KITT". It should never change him.


All in all the writers made a really big boo boo with the script. Let's hope we don't see that again.

Oh, and by the way, when Mike seemed annoyed by KITTs question, I took it to be because he was tempted to take KITT up on the lethal offer but he knew the right thing was non lethal. Kinda him begrudgingly saying, "Yeah KITT, I guess non lethal...sigh."

And KITT was NOT joking when he asked him that, no way. It wasn't written or acted by Val that way.

[Michael Pajaro]

Asimov's laws of robotics are fun to read within the context of his short stories, but they don't apply to Knight Rider. Neither the Knight 2000 nor the Knight 3000 are bound by those laws. Just looking at the Knight 2000, we know KITT can harm humans; we've seen him punch people with his doors (he punched a guy for making him say "ain't" in Killer KITT). We know he doesn't always do what humans tell him to do; he wouldn't let Michael climb inside when he was covered in mud in Custom KITT. These are just single examples, there are many others. But I think it's safe to say that Wilton Knight didn't incorporate the laws into KITT.

Not sure if I can think of a time when KITT willingly allowed himself to be harmed if he wasn't obeying a command from Michael or protecting him.

[My_Friend_KITT]

IMO, No matter how much learning KITT may have, he should NEVER under any circumstances take a human life. A hard-wire program (maybe Firmware) prevents it.

As per the Ryan Arrow incident, KITT was so infected by the virus that it prevented him from detecting said human life. He did not knowingly shoot at the occupied building.

This preservation of Human Life firmware is a very vital fragment of the KR world the new crew (writers) still haven't gotten right.

[Lynda414]

I agree that KITT should never take a human life purposefully. It may eventually happen that there is no choice, especially in the new series, or the choice is his Driver or someone else. I think something like that would have serious implications. And not warrant a casual exchange between Driver and KITT. I think that KITT would always choose non-lethal over lethal, unless there was no non-lethal option.

[KittKattBar]

Perhaps KI3T's programming was fundamentally altered by the nanovirus.

[bige]

I think Mike and KITT did not want to kill those 3 girls since at the end of that scene Mike tells KITT to call Carie, the reason how about since they got picked up by the FBI to be interagated by the FBI? I think that is why Mike & KITT did not kill them.

[WIBoomer1]

We know for a fact that Wilton Knight did not incorporate the 3 laws into his products...all you have to say is KARR!

Self-Preservation is NOT one of the laws.

[My_Friend_KITT]

The question should never had been asked....Instead, he should have offered the weapons list and have Mike make the decision.

And I sincerly believe that in this universe there is another way. There is always an alternative to killing.

[t.b.77b]

IMO, No matter how much learning KITT may have, he should NEVER under any circumstances take a human life. A hard-wire program (maybe Firmware) prevents it.

As per the Ryan Arrow incident, KITT was so infected by the virus that it prevented him from detecting said human life. He did not knowingly shoot at the occupied building.

This preservation of Human Life firmware is a very vital fragment of the KR world the new crew (writers) still haven't gotten right.

I agree KITT did not know that people were in the house because they were in the basement and the only mistake he made was him not listening to the "Do Not Shoot" order he did not kill Ryan knowing he was their he killed Ryan not knowing they were still in the building.

[lunchmeat]

Asimov's laws of robotics are fun to read within the context of his short stories, but they don't apply to Knight Rider. Neither the Knight 2000 nor the Knight 3000 are bound by those laws. Just looking at the Knight 2000, we know KITT can harm humans; we've seen him punch people with his doors (he punched a guy for making him say "ain't" in Killer KITT). We know he doesn't always do what humans tell him to do; he wouldn't let Michael climb inside when he was covered in mud in Custom KITT. These are just single examples, there are many others. But I think it's safe to say that Wilton Knight didn't incorporate the laws into KITT.

No, I agree. KI3T does not follow the Three Laws - that's Asimov, and Asimov alone. I brought this up, however, to state that any hardwired principle can cause unwanted results due to logical processing. In KI3T's case, he has a directive that states he should do no harm to people. Although we don't know what his true directive is, we can see that this statement is kind of vague - "do no harm to people". So how exactly does this work? We as humans understand this and it seems simple to us, but a machine would interpret this literally, which would have unknown implications. From this statement, can KI3T allow people to come to emotional harm? If someone asks him a question and the answer will cause some type of hurt, will he have to lie to avoid hurting someone?

It seems stupid, but that's the premise of many of Asimov's stories - getting inside the mind of a machine with directives. In KI3T's case, "doing no harm to people" may mean that he might have to prioritize lives to minimize collateral damage. We just don't know.

Not sure if I can think of a time when KITT willingly allowed himself to be harmed if he wasn't obeying a command from Michael or protecting him.

Yeah....I don't think that the Third Law is actually a directive programmed into either of the cars (although it would make sense as a basic function) but yeah, I can't specifically think of one either. There are many times when KITT did act in order to protect himself, like whenever people tried to tamper with him - one I remember most is in the first season of TOS, where Michael and KITT join a stunt show. One of the lackeys tries to sabotage KITT when Michael isn't around and KITT acts in interest of preventing harm to himself. (People banging on him with weapons and whatnot doesn't count because he can't be damaged that way.)

[PunkMaister]

This is an interesting thread and I feel it's appropriate to reference Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics:

1.) A robot cannot directly harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to be harmed.
2.) A robot cannot disobey a direct order from a human, unless it violates the first law.
3.) A robot cannot harm itself, or through inaction, allow itself to come to harm, unless violating the first or second law.

Asimov's stuff is pretty interesting - all of his stories revolve around these three laws, and how the robots ultimately interpret these laws. They're intriguing, offering up scenarios we might not have thought of.

In this case....it is an interesting dilemma. It is admittedly difficult to argue for KI3T's reasoning behind his question, when he had a non-lethal solution prepared for the problem at hand. While it does stand to reason that KI3T would defer to Michael in these situation, his question was unwarranted and does not fit with his core programming, as others have mentioned.

It is arguable that KI3T's lethal solution might have been faster than his darts - KI3T could have fired his laser at the three enemies, presumably requiring less targeting time and less startup time (KI3T had to extend the dart launcher physically aim at the antagonists, whereas a laser shot would have been instantaneous). We can argue that KI3T's programming places priority on Mike's life, and since Mike was in immediate danger, KI3T had to act quickly. We know that this is a TV show, but the characters had no way of knowing that the three ladies would stall - in the time that KI3T took to extend the dart launcher, the ladies could have shot Mike. I believe this is one reason why KI3T took the time to ask Michael his question.

Another reason deals with KI3T's preservation of life and conflicting values (which is why I mentioned Asimov earlier). This is a less plausible idea, but KI3T would logically have to place priority on all human lives he affects. In this case, these lives would include Mike's life, the life of the Ambassador hostage, the lives of the three female antagonists, and the life of the prison hostage. If one or more had to die, who would KI3T choose and why? Additionally, we'd have to factor in the situation as a whole, with the threat of a manufactured bomb on the horizon and Mike's exposure to radiation. That's a lot of processing, but KI3T probably came to a final conclusion for a course of action designed to save the most lives, as per Spock's directive. Knowing that a decision like this should be made by a higher authority, however, he deferred to Mike in this position.

Quite honestly? We'll never really know. It may have been an oversight on the writer's part, or it may actually get worked into something else. I don't think we'll ever know. However, as I stated before, there are a lot of good Asimov stories out there that deal with the First Law in particular, and they are interesting reads. Reading them might provide a greater understanding about how KI3T might think in a situation like this.

I agree although I do not think they integrated good Old Mr Assimovs directives into either the old KITT or the new one but you are right that it could at least partially explain how he thinks and functions.

IMO, No matter how much learning KITT may have, he should NEVER under any circumstances take a human life. A hard-wire program (maybe Firmware) prevents it.

As per the Ryan Arrow incident, KITT was so infected by the virus that it prevented him from detecting said human life. He did not knowingly shoot at the occupied building.

This preservation of Human Life firmware is a very vital fragment of the KR world the new crew (writers) still haven't gotten right.

What you and a whole lot of people fail to grasp is that the preservation of human life may include the taking of an individual life or a few individuals lives in order to prevent said individuals from doing harm to many inocent lives. Again I ask you and all those that for some unexplained sniglet of the universe think in absolutes. Would you rather have KITT allow such individual or individuals to do the damage just to comply with your absolute of preserving human life even when it will cost the lives of many inocent people? You see you always post and post but never have an answer for your absolutes and you never will!

[Mr.Marcus]

What you and a whole lot of people fail to grasp is that the preservation of human life may include the taking of an individual life or a few individuals lives in order to prevent said individuals from doing harm to many inocent lives. Again I ask you and all those that for some unexplained sniglet of the universe think in absolutes. Would you rather have KITT allow such individual or individuals to do the damage just to comply with your absolute of preserving human life even when it will cost the lives of many inocent people? You see you always post and post but never have an answer for your absolutes and you never will!

And what you fail to grasp is that this line of reasoning is irrelevant to this discussion and best used for analyzing a broad topic like capital punishment. Its KR and as such only the laws of the KR universe should apply not what we think is correct. The original series made it a clear point that KITT will not take a single human life b/c of his base programming. Not only did they play with this concept in a number of episodes, Chariot of Gold and Knight in Disgrace where KITT refused to help Michael steal the biochemical weapon b/c it endangered human life and Michael had to manually override his programming. But its also what separated him from KARR, a theme they explored in Trust Doesn't Rust. So for the new series to directly contradict this history when they seem eager to emulate the original series is puzzling at best and a lazy disregard at worst.

[dannycoventryuk]

kitt is learning and does what ever michael tells it to. artificial inteligence rather save the good than the bad

[PunkMaister]

And what you fail to grasp is that this line of reasoning is irrelevant to this discussion and best used for analyzing a broad topic like capital punishment. Its KR and as such only the laws of the KR universe should apply not what we think is correct. The original series made it a clear point that KITT will not take a single human life b/c of his base programming. Not only did they play with this concept in a number of episodes, Chariot of Gold and Knight in Disgrace where KITT refused to help Michael steal the biochemical weapon b/c it endangered human life and Michael had to manually override his programming. But its also what separated him from KARR, a theme they explored in Trust Doesn't Rust. So for the new series to directly contradict this history when they seem eager to emulate the original series is puzzling at best and a lazy disregard at worst.

Oh but it is relevant because even the original show was not about absolutes as much as you claim the contrary and your argument over the chemical weapons stolen in the old show does not hold any water as is a totally different situation from having to kill someone to save hundreds or more of innocent lives. Neither does your argument that this is about capital punishment as that is totally different circumstance as well, it is very different to have somebody executed after beign tried and found guilty of a capital offense and quitr another to take a life in order to preserve the lives of many. Thank you for proving what a moroon you are!

[Matthew]

Keep the personal insults to yourself please PunkMaister.

Matt